Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V10_3/V10_399.ZIP/V10_399

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 19KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/wZeYtwC00VcJ42IU4x>;
          Tue,  9 Jan 90 15:50:05 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue,  9 Jan 90 15:49:25 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #399

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 399

Today's Topics:
              Space Digest Mailing List
           Truly makes key appointments (Forwarded)
             Re: who's out there?
           Re: Launching AUSSAT on Chinese rockets
       Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles
              Re: Japanese Lunar Mission
       Re: Scientific value of Apollo (was Re: Motives)
            Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space
               Re: Simpler space suits?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:  Tue, 2 Jan 90 21:45 MST
From: [e-mail]
Subject:  Space Digest Mailing List
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I would like to request inclusion of the space digest mailing list.

Thanks,

Graham Jose
GJose.HisAust at PCO-MULTICS.HBI.HONEYWELL.COM

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 03:38:19 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Truly makes key appointments (Forwarded)

Mark Hess
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                    January 5, 1990

Dick Young
Kennedy Space Center, Fla.

RELEASE:  90-3

TRULY MAKES KEY APPOINTMENTS

     NASA Administrator Richard H. Truly today named Thomas E.
Utsman as the Deputy Associate Administrator for Space Flight
(Management) and James A. "Gene" Thomas as the Deputy Director of
the John F. Kennedy Space Center, Fla.

     In his new capacity, Utsman will have overall responsibility
for assisting William B. Lenoir, Associate Administrator for
Space Flight, in the day-to-day oversight management of the Space
Flight programs.  Specific responsibilities will include
overseeing procurement activities, assessing program management
performance and conducting long-range operational planning.
George Abbey continues in his capacity as Deputy Associate
Administrator.

     Utsman was both Deputy Director of Kennedy Space Center, a
post he held since August 1985, and Director of Space Transporta-
tion System Mangement and Operations, with responsibility for the
engineering management and technical direction of return-to-
flight activities in the post-Challenger era, which he performed
from December 1986 until March 1989.

     Utsman began his NASA career in 1963 as a facilities design
engineer in the Apollo program.  In 1971 he was named to head the
Design Engineering Directorate's Project Engineering Office,
which was assigned the task of converting old facilities and
building new facilities for launching the Space Shuttle.  He
subsequently served as Deputy Director of Project Management;
Associate Director of Design Engineering; Director, Operations
Management; Deputy Director and Director of Technical Support;
Director of Shuttle Operations; and Director of Shuttle
Management and Operations.

     Born in Detroit, Michigan, Utsman was graduated from Fordson
High School, Dearborn, in 1954.  He received a Bachelor of
Science degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of
Michigan in 1958 and a Master's Degree in Management from Florida
State University in 1968.

     Utsman has been the recipient of numerous honors and awards,
including the NASA Distinguished Service Medal and, most
recently, the Presidential Rank of Meritorious Executive for his
outstanding contributions to the Space Shuttle return-to-flight
effort.

     Thomas, who will serve as Deputy Director under Forrest S.
McCartney, has been the KSC Director of Safety, Reliability and
Quality Assurance since January 1987.  In that post he has been
responsible for developing and implementing overall safety policy
and procedures at KSC and activities relating to KSC progams at
Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., and Vandenberg Air Force
Base, Calif.

     He joined NASA in 1962 and served as lead engineer for
prelaunch testing and checkout of communications systems on the
Apollo spacecraft.

     Thomas became active in Space Shuttle activities early in
the progam, serving as the lead flight project engineer on the
KSC engineering team which participated in Orbiter Vehicle 101
(Enterprise) Approach and Landing Tests conducted at Edwards AFB,
Calif., in 1976 and 1977.

     From November 1977 until June 1983, Thomas was lead orbiter
flight project engineer for the Space Shuttle orbiter Columbia,
first vehicle in the fleet to begin space flight.  He later be-
came chief shuttle flight project engineer, Shuttle Engineering
Directorate, with overall responsibility for integration of all
testing and checkout of Shuttle orbiters, external tanks and
solid rocket booster flight hardware.

     From  September 1985 until December 1986, Thomas served as
Acting Director and subsequently Director, of Shuttle Launch and
Landing Operations.

     A native of Meridian, Miss., Thomas received his Bachelor of
Science degree in electrical engineering from Mississippi State
University in 1962.  He was graduated from Florida State Univer-
sity with a master's degree in technical management in 1973.

     His awards include the NASA Exceptional Service Medal in
1981 and the Outstanding Leadership Medal in 1989.

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 05:37:18 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: who's out there?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris Robertson) writes:
>Henry began in Saskatoon, and his interest in space was well
>established by the time he was in a high school.  Efforts to talk
>to the teachers there have unfortunately been unsuccessful, as the school
>doesn't seem to exist any more.  (When I mentioned this to Henry, he
>mailed something vague about being interested in chemistry at school, too.)
>...building where he was first based doesn't seem to exist any more...
>...since that building doesn't really exist any more -- it's been totally
>gutted and renovated into Admin offices.)

Chris has gotten the details a little mixed up here, alas, marring an
otherwise interesting and entertaining bio. :-)  Last time I saw it, the
high school was still intact.  (Yes, I was interested in chemistry, but
a little hydrogen sulfide in the air system doesn't count as demolition...)
It is true that I seem to leave a trail of devastation behind me, however.
My main elementary school is gone completely, both the place where I studied
and the place where I worked as an undergrad have been massively renovated,
the building where I was first a grad student did mostly go up in a fire
(the wing where I was located was largely saved, although post-fire
renovations largely obliterated it), and the temporary quarters did
get yet another drastic renovation job later.  I've been at Zoology for
a decade now, and am nervously anticipating the next disaster... after
ten years of quiescence, it's going to be impressive...

Rumors about my being difficult to physically locate are totally untrue;
the problem is getting me to cooperate when you find me. :-)  And these
preposterous suggestions that I am really an AI program are completely
and utterly without foundation foundation founda5ti@n f452$#*&n $#{};'-

KERNEL BUS ERROR, REBOOTING HENRY.TORONTO.EDU
Configuration...
Filesystem checks...
Saving temporaries...
Restoring network connections...

Sorry about that, my drink fell on the keyboard.  Hope there isn't any
irrelevant noise in this article as a result. :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 05:53:17 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Launching AUSSAT on Chinese rockets

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>    Henry if your going to condemn the Soviet Union for its actions in
>Afghanistan and attempt to white wash the current regime in China simply
>because it launches cheap rockets...

Launching cheap rockets has little or nothing to do with it.  And I'm not
trying to do any sort of "white wash", just pointing out that the world is
not black and white:  it's all shades of gray, and there are a good
many places with darker shades than those of China.  Thinking of politics
in terms of angels and devils, with nothing in between, leads to a lot
of problems.

More to the point, most everyone who has followed up either in public or
in private has ignored my main point:  trade policy should have some
inertia built in, and should not be arbitrarily altered in an attempt to
punish whoever this week's devils are.  Retroactively disapproving a
Long March launch that had been approved earlier has three consequences.
First, it breaks a promise the US made to China.  One may or may not
consider this significant.  Second, and more serious, it breaks a
promise the US made to US companies:  that they would be allowed to
use Long March for those launches.  Thirdly, and worst, it demonstrates
(yet again) to the rest of the world that promises made by US companies
are worthless, because the US government is willing to renege on its
approval whenever it feels like it.

As I said earlier, I have no quarrel with discouraging future use of
Long March (although it would be better if this policy were developed
together with the US's "allies", rather than being a unilateral decree,
since otherwise it simply guarantees that those contracts will go to
companies in France and elsewhere that are not restrained by US policy).
But approvals already given -- promises already made to US companies and
their customers -- should not be retroactively cancelled for any reason
short of impending war.  Otherwise, the US just reinforces its already
unenviable reputation as an unreliable and untrustworthy partner which
will break its solemn promises whenever they start to look inconvenient.

"The test of principles is whether they apply even to those you dislike."
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 05:58:47 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes:
>>I don't see
>>what difference it makes that the reactor is not operational...
>The halflife of U-235 is eight million times the halflife of Pu-238
>(the stuff used in RTGs), so, pound for pound, it is about 8 million
>times less radioactive...

More to the point, the dangerous part about a reactor is neither the
uranium nor any plutonium that happens to be around, but the fission
products, which are an ugly soup of highly radioactive and very
dangerous isotopes.  However, they don't come with the reactor -- they
are created during operation.  A reactor which has never gone critical
simply doesn't have any.

The Soviets have lost one or two radarsat reactors to launch accidents,
at least one going into the ocean, with no dire results.  Same reason:
those reactors are never operated until they are in orbit.
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 06:05:23 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Japanese Lunar Mission

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Neff) writes:
>Aviation Week is apparently reporting in Monday's edition that the
>Japanese are set to launch a lunar mission, THIS month -- the first
>since the Luna 24 sample return in 1976.  Is there any American
>participation on this?

Not that I'm aware of.  Note, however, that the "lunar mission" is
largely symbolic -- a lunar flyby by a probe bound elsewhere, and a
tiny subsatellite with zero payload going into lunar orbit.  As far
as I know, nobody has even approved funding for a follow-on.
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 6 Jan 90 06:14:46 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Scientific value of Apollo (was Re: Motives)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Neff) writes:
>Oh yes there are people today who say "On to Mars!", no doubt about it.
>The question is, exactly who USED to say Apollo was ridiculously
>inefficient but NOW says it was thorough and that THAT'S why we should
>go on to Mars.  I have never seen such a person...

I repeat my previous answer:  most of the big shots in the soi-disant
Planetary Society.  It is a matter of record that they were generally
opposed to Apollo in its early days.  It is also a matter of record
that they are now opposed to further lunar exploration, on the grounds
that:  "Humans have been to the Moon six times themselves, and more
often with robotic vehicles.  It is not a place crying out for further
exploration..."  [Louis Friedman, AW&ST 15 June 1987, page 394.]
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 90 21:54:48 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher Neufeld) writes:
>   We all hear of the famous lunar base to be built some day. Would it be
>unreasonable for a uranium powered breeder reactor to be built there
>eventually? [as a plutonium source for RTGs]

There has been some consideration of using a reactor to power a lunar base,
since the 14-day lunar night creates problems for solar power.  (There has
likewise been such discussion for a Mars outpost; Mars has short nights
but also has dust storms that cut off most sunlight for several weeks.)
I don't recall seeing any discussion of using it to get around the Christics,
though.  I think the biggest problem would be that you need a fair-sized
chemical plant to get the desired isotope, and only the desired isotope,
out of the nasty mess that the reactor produces.  I'm not sure exactly
how Pu238 is made, although I know it's trickier than Pu239 (the "main"
plutonium isotope, used in bombs and of interest as reactor fuel), and
Pu239 extraction is not simple.
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 7 Jan 90 23:14:00 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Simpler space suits?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (William Watson) writes:
>3)    Maintain a "suitable" air pressure over the entire body of the
>    wearer.  (Is this actually required, in that cells exposed to vacuum
>    burst, or die in some other way?)  This requirement forces the
>    design to be quite complex...

Maintaining pressure on the body surface is unfortunately necessary.
Exposure to vacuum does not (contrary to folklore) have any immediate
disastrous effect, as skin really is pretty tough stuff.  However, the
loss of pressure causes gas to be generated internally, which causes
swelling to start after a few seconds.  Initial swelling is reversible
with no ill effects, but later stages undoubtedly do permanent harm.
Eventually the major body fluids will boil.

A significant side issue is that pressures inside the lung and outside
the chest must balance fairly well, else breathing will be impossible
(and lung damage is possible).

It is possible to maintain *pressure* without *air pressure*, however,
using what are essentially very tight and strong leotards.  The skin is
exposed to vacuum, but swelling and other ill effects are prevented by
mechanical pressure.  This concept works; it has been tried in vacuum
chambers.  Problems remain, and more work would be needed to produce a
viable spacesuit based on it, but it appears likely that a much less
restricting spacesuit could be built along those lines.  The early work
was funded by NASA; no work is currently being done on it.

>5)    Protect the wearer from exposure to intense solar radiation.
>    (First cut approximation:  assume near-Earth use - UV induced
>    melanoma seems to be a concern...

So is sunburn.  Naked skin exposed to raw near-Earth sunlight will start
to burn in something like 30 seconds, as I recall.

>6)    Protect the wearer from micro-meteors.  (Is the flux of high-speed
>    sand significant?  Does the current design really provide any
>    effective protection?)

The current designs provide considerable protection, with a substantial
outer suit that is basically thermal insulation plus armor.  My guess,
made without checking the numbers, is that natural debris is not much
of a concern, but in low orbit the man-made junk is a real issue.

>7)    Be comfortable enough that the wearer can stay in the suit for
>    extended periods of time.  Extended wear also implies methods
>    for feeding and relieving the wearer.

Such means are currently rather primitive, actually.  Today's suits do
have minimal provisions for water and food, but "relief" is basically
via a high-tech diaper.  Well, the male astronauts have a relief-tube
arrangement for urine, but that doesn't work for the females, and there
just ain't no graceful way to deal with crapping in a suit.  "Extended
periods" currently means 4-6 hours at most.  The diaper is mostly for
female urine and, uh, sudden emergencies.
--
1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V10 #399
*******************